2

Table of Contents

Table of Contents Acronyms and Abbreviations Foreword

1. Executive Summary 2. The Handling of Complaints

2.1 Complaints Handled through Problem-Solving

2.1.1 Introduction2.1.2 New Requests 2.1.3. Ongoing Requests 2.1.4 Resolved and Closed Requests

2.2 Complaints Handled Through Compliance Review

2.2.1 New Requests2.2.2 On-going Cases under monitoring

3. Spot-Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance 3.1 Introduction

3.2 The Guidelines on the Operational Procedures for the IRM

Advisory Function

3.3 The Spot-Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance:

The Road Sector Support Project II, Tanzania

4. Outreach Activities 4.1 Introduction

4.2 Activities organized by CRMU

4.3 IRM Participation in other Events

4.4 Communication and Information Dissemination

5. Trends and Lessons 6. CRMU Staff 7. Members of the IRM Roster of Experts 8. Financial Matters9. Annexes

235

799

9101114

16

1723

2727

28

28

3333

34

34

35

3741475153

3

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ADB African Development Bank

ADF African Development Fund

ADA Agricultural Development Agency of Morocco

AfDB African Development Bank Group

AWSB Athi Water Services Board

CDRT Centre de Développement de la Région de Tensift

CSOs Civil Society Organizations

CRMU Compliance Review and Mediation Unit

ESAP Environmental and Social Assessment Procedures

ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

GRMs Grievance Redress Mechanisms

IACD Integrity and Anti-Corruption Department

IAMs Independent Accountability Mechanisms

IRM Independent Review Mechanism

ISS Integrated Safeguards System

KCCA Kampala City Council Authority

KURA Kenya Urban Roads Authority

MAFO Bank Country Office in Morocco

MAP Mediation Action Plan

PAPs Project Affected People

PIUs Project Implementation Units

RAP Resettlement Action Plan

TANROADS Tanzania National Roads Agency

4

5

The Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) achieved its objectives in 2016. The end users of the IRM benefited from both its

problem-solving and compliance review func-tions. For example, remedial actions undertaken through sustained involvement of the IRM over the past few years have helped 500 households and six villages with improved access to water supply and the restoration of agricultural lands damaged by the construction of the Marrakech - Agadir Motorway project in Morocco.

The complaint about this case has now been re-solved. Payment of adequate compensation for losses of assets and income to 3,618 people and business owners affected by the Road Sector Support Project II in Tanzania was made. The in-creasing demand for the IRM compliance review function by civil society organizations (CSOs) is evident in the growing number of complaints. The trend is an important indication of stakeholders’ trust and interest in seeing that Bank Group fi-nanced operations are more influenced by par-ticipatory approaches and stakeholder engage-ment in respect of development in Africa.

The complainants and the CSOs are to be com-mended for their continued cooperation with the IRM. The Bank Management and the borrowers’ commitments towards fulfilling the remedial ac-tions were also instrumental in redressing the plight of the affected people. The new Spot Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance function of the IRM that enables an investigation to be triggered about a project from within the Bank is proof positive of institutional learning. The first advisory review report issued in 2016 infor-med Management about certain infringements to Bank Group policies and procedures appli-cable to the Tanzania Road Sector II project, and underscored the need to make our clients fully aware of the Bank Group safeguards policies.

I was pleased with the joint outreach activities we co-organized with those Departments in the Bank responsible for civil society organizations (CSOs) and Environmental and Social Safeguards. Wit-hout prejudicing the independence of the IRM, these events show the Bank’s commitment to engaging with CSOs and its full appreciation of the importance of safeguards-related issues. In our vision, the mandate of the IRM, which is to give redress to people who have been adversely affected by projects financed by the Bank Group, is central to the High 5 priorities of the Bank1

and is aimed at improving the living standards of people of Africa. Consequently, we will work with Management and put greater emphasis on the accountability of Bank Group financed ope-rations in the context of the New Development and Business Delivery Model. The positive contri-bution of the IRM will encourage the promotion of a high quality and effective compliance culture across the new organizational structure.

SEKOU TOURE, DIRECTOR, BCRM

Foreword

1Light up and Power Africa, Feed Africa, Industrialize Africa, Integrate Africa and Improve the Quality of Life for the People of Africa

6

7

The Compliance Review and Mediation Unit (CRMU) received four new Complaints in 2016 while it closely monitored the imple-

mentation of the remedial action plan prepared by Management to bring two projects subject to complaints into compliance with the Bank’s poli-cies and procedures. In addition, two cases were closed, making the problem-solving approach useful not only for the Bank but also for the com-plainants with the satisfactory resolution of their grievances.

Problem-solving activities covered six requests. Two of five complaints were resolved and closed to the satisfaction of the Requestors. A new com-plaint was received, while three ongoing requests achieved the milestones of their progress.

The CRMU observed a steady increase of com-plaints submitted by civil society organizations (CSOs) for compliance review. A case in point concerns the three new requests relating to Bank-financed projects in Mali, Senegal and Gui-nea. The Mali case concerns a private sector pro-ject, the Modern Mills. The Boards of Directors approved the complaint’s eligibility assessment report which had recommended that the project undergoes a compliance review. The Senegal case also relates to a private sector project, the Sendou Coal Power Plant. The IRM undertook the request eligibility assessment mission.

Finally, a case in Guinea relates to a public sector operation, the Multinational Road Development and Transport Facilitation Programme within the Manu River. The CRMU carried out the prelimina-ry assessment and registered the request.

Meanwhile, the IRM monitored the implementa-tion of the Management Mitigation Action Plans for two requests registered in 2010 and 2007 res-

pectively, and relating to energy projects financed by the Bank Group in South Africa and Uganda. For South Africa, the IRM Experts completed the desk review for the second IRM monitoring of the Medupi Power Project.

The IRM Experts assessed the sixth supervision report on the implementation of the Management Action Plan with a view to bringing the project into compliance with the Bank’s policies and procedures. In Uganda, the Management Mitiga-tion Action Plan for the Bujagali Hydropower and Interconnection Projects was to all intents and purposes completed.

The Road Sector Support Project II in Tanzania underwent the newly established Spot Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance, and the Boards of Directors approved the recommenda-tions of the Spot Check Report on 23 November 2016.

The planned outreach activities were completed. These comprised a national workshop, a commu-nity session as well as a staff seminar in Burki-na Faso and finally a staff seminar in Senegal. In addition, the IRM webpage was revamped while outreach materials were disseminated to Bank country offices and Bank operations complexes, CSOs and project implementation units. Finally, the CRMU’s communication strategy was fina-lized.

The IRM recognized some challenges for com-pliance with the Bank safeguard policies during this year. From handling the complaints and un-dertaking the spot check, the CRMU noticed the pressing need to familiarize the Requestors, the Bank staff and the projects sponsors with the IRM Rules to enhance their capacity to engage with the mechanism’s processes in an effective way.

1 Executive Summary

8

MANDATE OF THE IRM

The Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) provides people adversely affected by a project financed by the African Development Bank Group (AfDB) with an independent mechanism through which they can request the AfDB to comply with its own policies and procedures.The IRM intervenes when people or communities affected submit a complaint. In this way, the IRM can be considered as a recourse instrument for project affected people who have previously been unable to resolve their problems with the AfDB’s Management. The IRM is administered by the Compliance Review and Mediation Unit of the Bank (CRMU).

SPOT CHECK ADVISORY REVIEW OF PROJECT COMPLIANCE

In addition to handling complaints submitted by people affected by Bank Group financed projects, the IRM was authorized by the Boards of Directors in 2015 to undertake an advisory function, which consists of Advisory services provided by CRMU and Spot-check advisory reviews of project compliance undertaken by the IRM Experts.

At the beginning of each calendar year, CRMU will select not more than two (2) high-risk (environmental and social) on-going projects on which the IRM Expert will conduct spot-checks to assess the Bank Group’s compliance with its policies and procedures.

9

2.1 Complaints Handled Through Problem-Solving

2.1.1 Introduction

The CRMU handled six Requests through Pro-blem-Solving. One new Request was received, registered and under assessment, while three on-going Requests were managed and two were closed to the satisfaction of the Requestors.

The beneficiaries of Problem-Solving Remedial Actions in 2016 included: 500 households and six villages by providing improved access to wa-ter supply and the restoration of agricultural lands which were damaged by the Construction of the

Marrakech – Agadir Motorway, Morocco; and payment of compensation to 3618 people and business owners affected by the Road Sector Support Project II in Tanzania.

The objective of the Problem-Solving Exercise is to help the complainants, the project promo-ters and the Bank (the parties) to find mutually agreeable solutions to the problems raised by the Requestors.

The Director of the CRMU facilitates these exer-cises and monitors the implementation of the resulting Remedial Action Plans agreed by the parties. The objective of these plans is to redress the damage caused to people affected by the projects (PAPs) and/or the environment.

2 The Handling of Complaints

10

2.1.2 New Requests

Technical Program to Promote Youth Agri-business Employment Program (JEA), Morocco

The Complaint about this project was submitted to the CRMU in September 2016 by the Agricultural Engineers and Technicians Association, which represents trainers who stand to benefit from the JEA program.

The total cost of the project is Euro 685,000, financed by both the Bank and the Government of Morocco. The Boards of Directors approved this project in 2012 to be implemented for a period of 24 months.

The primary concern of the complainants is that the Agricultural Development Agency (ADA) of Morocco, the project’s executing agency, had engaged them in training activities delivered by UNOPS under this program, presumably to help them access finance to establish their small businesses.

The complainants accused the ADA of abandoning them after they had prepared the required feasibility studies. In their view, the ADA action undermined both the program and its objective, to promote agri-business, as well as

the government’s strategy to create ‘fast-track” youth employment.

The complainants argued that some of the trainees had left their jobs to join this program and others had rented agricultural lands in anticipation of having access to the finance facilitated by the JEA program. They asked the Bank Country Office in Morocco (MAFO) to assist in resolving these issues.

A copy of the same Complaint had been received earlier by the CRMU from MAFO. In its follow-up with MAFO, the task manager informed the CRMU that the Bank financed two components of the program, that is, the training and the preparation of business plans, while the ADA and the other credit agency were responsible for facilitating the access to finance. Subsequently, in July 2016, the CRMU received formal communication from the task manager that included a signed attestation by the ADA and the Requestors that the issue had been resolved.

The CRMU communicated this information to the Requestors who reacted only in September 2016 with another letter complaining that their access to finance was still outstanding. The CRMU has planned a mission to Morocco in the first quarter of 2017 to explore solutions to the concerns raised by the Requestors.

11

2.1.3 Ongoing Requests

The Outer Ring Road Project, Kenya

The CRMU registered the Request relating to this project for both Problem-Solving and Com-pliance Review on 07 October 2015. The Boards of Directors had approved the project loan of UA 86,400,000 on 13 November 2013. The project was classified as Category I high risk due to its negative impacts on people. The Request was submitted by open-air traders claiming that the Kenya Urban Roads Authority (KURA), the pro-ject implementation unit, had excluded them, without consultation, from the list of those eli-gible for compensation despite the fact they had operated their businesses in the project area for between seven (7) and twenty (20) years. The Request was the second submitted by these complainants. The first, received by the CRMU in 2014, had not been registered because the complainants had not presented their concerns to the Bank Management before communica-ting with the CRMU, as required under the pre-vious IRM Operating Rules and Procedures of 2010. Nevertheless, the Director of the CRMU facilitated discussion between the complainants, KURA and the Bank. As a result, in June 2014, the parties informed the Director of CRMU that KURA had agreed to consider payment of com-pensation to the complainants. However, on 14 September 2015, the CRMU received the se-cond Request with the information that KURA had not fulfilled its commitments and the com-plainants were still not on the list of individuals to be compensated.

In its response to the second Request, the Bank Management referred to the agreement between KURA and the PAPs, including the complainants. The agreement indicated that the Requestors were not only eligible for compensation, but they were also to represent other PAPs in the Project Grievance Redress Mechanism. Thereafter, the Director of the CRMU received formal commu-nication from the Requestors confirming their satisfaction with the outcome of this agreement.

With the Request already registered, the CRMU will carry out a mission in the first quarter of 2017 to confirm the fulfillment of this agreement by KURA, formally close the Request and submit the Report on the Closure of this Problem-Sol-ving Exercise to the Boards of Directors. In line with the IRM Rules of 2010, the Director will also submit the Request to the IRM Experts to assess its eligibility for Compliance Review.

The Nairobi River Rehabilitation and Restoration Program: Sewerage

Improvement Project, Kenya

The CRMU registered this Request for pro-blem-solving on 09 July 2015. The project loan of UA 39.87 million was approved by the Boards of Directors on 06 December 2010. The project was classified as Category 1 high risk, due to its potential negative impacts on both the environ-ment and people.

The Requestors are two affected families who claimed that the Nanchang Sewerage Company in charge of building the sewerage lines had installed pipes through their private compound. They claimed to have suffered material damages and health problems, and despite of their re-peated demands for compensation, they never received a response from the Athi Water Services Board (AWSB), the project implementation unit.

The complainants feared the contractor would leave the site without completing the repair works. The Management Response to the Request sub-mitted to the CRMU on 06 August 2015 included several remedial actions, which the CRMU mo-nitored. Subsequently, the Director of the CRMU received formal communication from the AWSB, the Bank and the Requestors that maintenance works had been carried out to the satisfaction of the complainants. Since the Request had already been registered, the Director of the CRMU will carry out a follow–up mission in the first quarter of 2017 to confirm that the Requestors are satis-fied, that the Request can be formally closed, and submit the Report on the Closure of this exercise to the Boards of Directors.

12

WHO CAN FILE A COMPLAINT

The CRMU can receive requests for recourse from to or more persons (such as community of persons, an organization, society or other grouping of individuals) or by a qualified representative of the affected persons. Requestors have to demonstrate that their rights or interests have been or are likely to be adverserly affected by the non-compliance with the relevand Bank Group Policies.

13

The Improvement of Health Services Delivery at the Mulago Hospital and

in the City of Kampala, Uganda

The CRMU registered this Request for pro-blem-solving on 17 March 2014. The Boards of Directors had approved this project on 6 July 2011, at a cost of UA 56 million. The project was classified as Category 2 due to its minimal envi-ronmental and social impacts.

The Requestors are an affected family who claim that the Government had forcibly acquired their late father’s clinic in the 1970s and rehabilitated it into Mulago hospital without providing compen-sation. The Requestors questioned the accuracy of land title records presented by the Government to the Bank during the approval of the loan for the hospital’s rehabilitation. On 07 August 2015, the Management Response to the Request was submitted to the CRMU, and confirmed that the Bank had verified the land titles presented by the Government prior to the project’s approval, and had followed proper due diligence processes.

The CRMU conducted a fact-finding mission to Uganda from 07 to 09 May 2014, and reported

the outcome to the Boards of Directors on 04 June 2014. The Parties agreed to a problem-sol-ving initiative. Consequently, the CRMU under-took a follow-up mission to Uganda from 17 to 19 February 2015 to compile records from both the family and the Government. Despite several attempts by the CRMU to reconcile the parties, the Government and the Requestors are still in disagreement on the authenticity of the Land Re-gistry records relating to the plot where the hos-pital is being built. The CRMU reported this stalemate to the Boards’ Committee on Operation Effectiveness (CODE) in July 2016. The Committee invited Bank Manage-ment to organize further follow-up consultations with the Government.

The CRMU also followed up with the complai-nants and the Bank to keep the parties engaged. But the Government responded by maintaining that the Kampala City Council had purchased the disputed lot of land from the mother of the Requestors (now deceased). The Director of the CRMU will carry out a follow up mission to consult again with the Government and the Requestors in an ultimate attempt to resolve this stalemate within the completion phase of the project.

14

2.1.4 Resolved and Closed Requests

The CRMU closed two cases in 2016

Construction of the Marrakech Agadir Motorway, Morocco

The first related to the Construction of the Mar-rakech – Agadir Motorway Project in Morocco which has been under the CRMU monitoring for the last four years. Reports on the case can be found at: www.afdb.org/irm.

The case submitted by the Centre de Dévelop-pement de la Region de Tensift (CDRT) on behalf of the PAPs who lived along the Chichaoua-Imin-tanout section of the Motorway was registered for problem-solving and compliance review on 29 July 2010. The problem -solving exercise of this Request was formally closed in April 2016. Through this process, 500 households and six villages had improved access to water sup-ply and saw the restoration of agricultural lands which were damaged by the project. The imple-mentation of these mitigation actions were made possible because of the strong engagement of CDRT.

With regard to the Request’s eligibility for com-pliance review, the IRM Experts submitted their independent assessment to the Boards of Direc-tors in January 2012. They found the Request ineligible for Compliance Review. At the end of the problem solving process, the Requestor sent its own evaluation of the Problem-Solving Exer-cise to the CRMU in December 2015.

Road Sector Support Project II, Tanzania

The CRMU received the Request relating to Road Sector Support Project II (RSSP II) on 5 June 2012, two months after the Boards of Direc-tors approved the project. The RSSP II costing UA 212.8 million is co-financed by the Bank (UA 140.00 million), the Japan International Coopera-tion Agency (JICA) (JPY 7,659,000,000.00) and the Government of Tanzania (USD 8.43 million). The Government contribution covers the com-pensation of the PAPs who live along the three sections of the road to be upgraded by the RSSP II, namely, Dodoma-Babati, Tunduru-Mangaka

and Mangaka-Mtambaswala. The RSSP II was classified as a Category I high risk due to its po-tential negative impacts on people and the envi-ronment.

The Requestors are two nationals living on the Dodoma-Babati road section, who claimed to hold formal land titles but were forced by the Tanzania National Roads Agency (TANROADS), the project implementation unit, to demolish their houses without compensation. This is because TANROADS considered their properties as ille-gally built on the Road Reserve, a situation which presumably affected many other people living along the road.

The Management Response to the Request sub-mitted to the CRMU on 23 July 2012 included an Action Plan prepared by TANROADS and the Bank to resolve the PAPs’ problems of compen-sation. Under this plan, TANROADS agreed to withdraw the demolition notices and submit proof of compensation of the PAPs to the Bank prior to the commencement of construction works.

The first Mediation Meeting organized by the CRMU on 18 October 2012 culminated in the si-gning of a Settlement Agreement and an auxiliary Mediation Action Plan (MAP) by the Requestors, the Bank and TANROADS. The MAP included timelines for the payment of compensation to the Requestors and the other PAPs affected by RSSP II, as well as the operationalization of the Grievance Redress Mechanisms (GRMs). The CRMU recruited an independent consultant to monitor the implementation of the MAP.

The 1st Monitoring Report, issued in May 2013, established that TANROADS had withdrawn the demolition notices but with delays in establishing the GRMs and the valuation of affected proper-ties. Consequently, the CRMU’s second Media-tion Meeting held on 18 June 2013, updated the timelines of the MAP, and facilitated TANROADS’ disclosure of compensation amounts, as deter-mined by the Land Valuer, to the Requestors, who accepted these amounts.

The 2nd Monitoring Report, issued on 26 March 2016, focused on the compensation of PAPs on the other two sections of the road (i.e.,Tundu-ru-Mangaka and Mangaka-Mtambaswala). The report highlighted several issues comprising:

15

• Thearbitrarydepreciationofvalueofaffectedproperties;

• The non-compensation of informal bu-sinesses for loss of income because they did not have audited accounts; and

• NumerouspendingcasesbeforetheGRMs.

At the CRMU’s third meditation meeting held on 15 July 2016 attended by the Requestors, the Bank and TANROADS’ Chief Executive, the Re-quest was closed in light of the TANROADS’ and Bank’s commitments to address and monitor the aforementioned issues, as well as the Reques-tors’ satisfaction with the outcome of the Pro-blem-Solving Exercise.

Complaint Relating to the Construction of the Marrakech Agadir Motorway, Morocco

Issues Resolved by the Problem-Solving Exercise

• DamagetohousesduetoblastingandseparationofcommunitiesfromtheirMosquebythemotorway in Douar (village) Sidi Mohamed Samba;

• Lackof roadcrossing infrastructure inBouafiren–Chichaua,partof theChichuaoua–Imin-tanout road section;

• LackofroadcrossinginfrastructureanddisruptionofwatercourseandrunoffinDouarJdidaand Douar Hssain;

• LackofroadcrossinginDouarTalmestandMellal;• Degradationof landduetoflooding fromthevalley inDouar Imiliine (CommunedeOuedEl

Bour) since the gravelling of the valley diverted the normal water course; and• DestructionofwatersourcesandinadequateroadcrossingatDouarTaliint.

16

2.2 Complaints Handled Through Compliance Review

In 2016, the CRMU registered three new Re-quests for compliance review. It also monitored the implementation of the Management Action Plans for two Requests relating to energy pro-jects financed by the Bank Group in South Afri-ca and Uganda received by the CRMU in 2010 and 2007 respectively. The objective of a com-pliance review is to determine whether people have suffered, or are likely to suffer harm from a project as a result of non-compliance with the Bank’s safeguards policies and procedures at any point from design to completion including

if the project is still under consideration for fi-nancing.

The Compliance Review is undertaken by the IRM Experts with four sequential steps: (i) assessment of the eligibility of the Request for compliance review; (ii) on approval by the Boards of Direc-tors, investigation to establish whether or not the harm suffered resulted from non-compliance with Bank policies and procedures; (iii) preparation of a Compliance Review Report with recommen-dations on mitigation actions to be undertaken by Bank Management to bring the project into com-pliance with Bank policies and procedures; and (iv) monitoring of the implementation of Management Action Plans.

17

2.2.1 New Requests

Multinational-Road Development and Transport Facilitation Program within the Mano River Union–Guinea Section The Multinational-Road Development and Transport Facilitation Program within the Mano River Union (covering Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea and Liberia) was approved by the Boards of Directors on 18 December 2014. The loan to Guinea for $ 11,774,000 was to be used to pave the 39.75 km dirt road from Lola City to the border of Cote d’Ivoire at the Gouéla Post. Roadworks were expected to start at the end of the rainy season in October 2016 and to be completed over 20 months. The project was classified as Category 1 high risk, due to its potential negative impacts on both the environment and people.

On 15 September 2016, the CRMU received a Complaint relating to this Program, and specifically to the Guinean section of the road. The Complaint was submitted by two Guinean nationals who work for Agroforestry Resources Unlimited (ARU), a non-governmental organization focusing on environmental protection and governance.

The Requestors raised several issues:

• The irreparable harm the project will causeto the people and the environment, claiming that the project will damage the ecosystem that provides the people on this section of the road their livelihoods;

• Theviolationofbothnationalandinternationallaws; specifically that the roadworks and clearance will occur within the boundary of the Nimba Mountains Strict Nature Reserve, a World Heritage Site (WHS) and a core area of the Nimba Mountains Biosphere Reserve (NMBR), which is protected by both Guinean law and the International Convention for the Protection of Cultural and Natural World Heritage, ratified by Guinea;

• The inadequacy of the Environmental andSocial Impact Assessment of the project in February 2013 (ESIA) as it did not consider the statutory protection of the Nimba Mountains;

• The lack of public consultations as required by Guinean law;

• ThepartialnatureoftheESIAintermsofba-seline characterization;

• Theinadequateassessmentofpotentialim-pacts and the relevant mitigation measures; and

18

• TheviolationoftheAfDB’sIntegratedSafe-guards System of December 2013; most notably, Operational Safeguards 1 and 3 on ‘Environmental and Social Assessment’ and ‘Biodiversity, Renewable Resources and Ecosystem Services’.

The CRMU conducted the preliminary review of this Request and established that it meets the

criteria for registration under the IRM Operating Rules and Procedures of 2015. The CRMU re-gistered the Complaint on 28 November 2016.

The Bank Management Response to the Re-quest was received on 27 December 2016. The CRMU and the IRM Experts will undertake a Request eligibility assessment mission in 2017.

Construction of a 125 Mw Coal Sendou Power Plant, Senegal

The CRMU received two Requests relating to the Sendou Power Plant Project negative impacts on the people in the villages of Bargny and Minam as well as the environment. The Boards of Direc-tors approved this private sector project on 25 November 2009.

The total cost of the project is Euro 164,610,732, and the Bank loan is Euro 49,392,473. The pro-ject is a public-private partnership initiative co-fi-nanced by the Banque Ouest Africaine de Deve-loppement (BOAD) and the Netherlands

Development Bank (Nederlandse Financie-rings-Maatschappij voor Ontwikkelingslanden N.V. (FMO).

The project is classified as Category 1 high risk in accordance with the Bank’s previous Environ-mental and Social Assessment Procedures for the Private Sector Operations 2001, which was applicable before the Bank’s Integrated Safe-guards System that came into effect in July 2014.The first Request was submitted to the CRMU on 09 May 2016 on behalf of various PAPs by Tak-kom Jerry, and Lumière Synergie pour le Déve-loppement, two national civil society organizations (hereinafter referred to as, “the First Requestors”).

19

The Requestors asked the CRMU to handle their Complaint through both problem-solving and compliance review. During the prelimina-ry review of this Request, on 15 July 2016, the CRMU received the second Request sent by two individuals, Mr. Cheikh Fadel Wade and Mr. Daouda Gueye, on behalf of other members of the communities in Bargny (hereinafter referred to as “the Second Requestors”), challenging the representational authority of the First Requestors to act on behalf of all the PAPs. The Second Re-questors asked for a Compliance Review of the project. Needing to clarify the representational authority held by the Requestors as stipulated in Paragraph 14 of the IRM Operating Rules and Procedures, the CRMU carried out a preliminary assessment, including a field mission to Senegal. The CRMU established that both Requestors ful-filled the requirements by providing the CRMU with written signed proof that they act on behalf of PAPs. The First Requestors also confirmed their desire to see their Request handled through compliance review.

The two Requests raised the following com-plaints about the Sendou coal power plant:

• InadequatepublicconsultationswithPAPs;• Breach of the AfDB’s environmental, so-

cial and human rights standards since no

compensation was paid to the majority of owners who proclaimed to hold land titles within the site of plant;

• NoResettlementActionPlanwaspreparedto mitigate the project’s negative social im-pacts;

• Theselectionoftheprojectsiteviolatesar-ticle L13 of the National Code of the Envi-ronment, with the Sendou plant site being less than 2kms from an existing cement factory and another forthcoming larger ca-pacity (250MW) coal-fired power plant to be built close to this site;

• The increased vulnerability of communitiesto air pollution and potential disruption of their livelihoods because of the proximity of the coal power plant to the town’s wa-ter supply, public facilities (including the elementary school, a health center, a kin-dergarten, cemetery) and the only fishery product processing site that employs about 1000 women and other seasonal and tem-porary workers;

• Healthrisksfromairpollutionduetoemis-sions from the Sendou plant, the cement factory and the other coal-fired power plant planned close to the same site, with no cumulative impact assessment study pre-pared to measure the effects of emissions from these three plants;

20

• Theadverseimpactofthecoalpowerplanton a historic heritage site which houses a tree believed in as protecting the spirit of the village and a nursery for the regeneration of marine biodiversity; and

• Theincreasedvulnerabilityofthecommunityto the consequences of coastal erosion.

Since the two Complaints relate to the same project and raise similar issues, the Director of the CRMU decided to combine them into one Request but engage the Requestors separately in the process. After the assessment of the two Complaints, the CRMU determined that the Re-quests fall within the mandate of the IRM and meet the registration criteria of the IRM Opera-ting Rules and Procedures. The CRMU registe-

red the Complaint on 05 August 2016 for com-pliance review and received the Management Response to the Request on 4 October 2016.

The IRM Experts and the Director of the CRMU conducted the eligibility assessment of the Request in Senegal from 24 to 30 November 2016. The Eligibility Report is now under prepa-ration and will be submitted in the first quarter of 2017 for consideration by the Boards of Di-rectors. The compliance review is also planned for the second quarter of 2017, if authorized by the Boards of Directors. The investigation will determine whether or not harm has been, or is likely to be caused to people due to the project’s non-compliance with the Bank policies and procedures.

21

The Diversification of the Activities of the Modern Mills Project in Mali

On 23 September 2015, the CRMU received the Request relating to the Diversification of the Ac-tivities of Modern Mills Project (the M3 Project) in Mali through the Integrity and Anti-Corruption Department (IACD) of the AfDB. The Complaint was also addressed to the Bank Group’s Board of Governors. The Request was submitted by Afrique-Europe Interact, an international NGO with local representation in Mali. The Boards of Directors approved this project on 23 June 2014, with a senior loan of EUR 16.8 million. The Bor-rower is a limited liability company established in 2007 and belonging to the Group Keita. The pro-ject components include the installation of units for the production of couscous and pasta, and in-cludes silos for the storage of raw materials (hard wheat, soft wheat, maize, millet and sorghum), as well as three mills for the production of meal and flour to be used to supply production lines. The M3 Project is classified as Category 2 me-dium risk.

In 2016, the CRMU determined the eligibility of the Request for compliance review and registe-red it in the IRM Register of Requests.

The Requestor complained about a number of issues:

• Land grabbing by the project, with thoseinhabitants of Sanamadougou and Sahou villages who had refused to leave their agricultural lands at the beginning of the project, allegedly subjected to serious violations of their rights and threats to their physical security;

• Anumberof thePAPswerenot compensa-ted while some others received only symbo-lic compensation amounts for their lands and properties; and

• The Bank loanwas granted to theM3 Pro-ject on two conditions; first, that no procee-dings about the project were pending before the courts, and second, that the families affe-ted had received financial compensation. The complainant accused the M3 Project of having received the Bank loan by deliberately provi-ding misleading and/or fraudulent informa-tion that there was no court case, and that all the villagers had received their compensation when in fact only a small number of families (8) had received what is referred to as merely symbolic compensation.

The Requestor included in its Complaint a list of PAPs with their signatures and asked that this list be compared with any list submitted by the M3 Project to the Bank.

The CRMU conducted a preliminary assessment of the Request, discovering that the land dispute between the M3 Project and the PAPs may have been pending before the national courts; however, it was unclear from the Request whether or not the legal cases were still pending or had been resolved.

The IRM Operating Rules and Procedures prevent the IRM from handling matters before national courts. In addition, it was also unclear if the NGO had obtained representational authority to act on behalf of the PAPs.

Therefore, with such uncertainty surrounding the court cases and representational authority, the CRMU did not register the Request in the first instance.

FUNCTION OF THE IRM

The IRM handles requests through Compliance Review (investigation) and Problem-Solving (me-diation). The IRM perform an advisory function which consists of Advisory services and Spot-check advisory reviews of project compliance. The compliance review and Spot-check advisory reviews of project compliance are undertaken by a Panel of Independent Group of Experts (The IRM Ex-perts). CRMU undertakes the problem-solving exercises, Advisory services and outreach activities to fulfill its mandate and to contribute to the overall objectives of the AfDB.

22

The CRMU continued with the fact-finding exercise to gather additional information regarding this project. By March 2016, the CRMU received confirmation that the court proceedings had been closed by the time the Request was sent to IACD and later transmitted to the CRMU.

Given the circumstances surrounding this project, the Director of the CRMU determined that the Request meets the registration requirements of the IRM Operating Rules and Procedures, pending clarification of whether the PAPs had given full authority to the international NGO to duly represent them. The Request was finally registered for compliance review on 12 May 2016.

The Bank Management Response to the Request expected by the CRMU by 13 June 2016, was received on 22 August 2016.

The IRM Experts and the Director of the CRMU conducted the eligibility assessment of the Request in Mali from 20 to 26 June 2016.

During this mission, the PAPs selected two of them to stand on their own behalf in this case, while continuing to receive technical advice from the international NGO that originally submitted the Request to the CRMU. On 23 November 2016, the Boards of Directors approved the IRM Eligibility Report and authorized the IRM to conduct a compliance review of the M3 Project.

The investigation will determine whether or not a harm has been, or is likely to be caused, as alleged by the Requestors, due to the project’s non-compliance with the Bank Group’s applicable policies and procedures. The Compliance Review will be undertaken in the first quarter of 2017.

23

2.2.2 On-going Cases under Monitoring

The Medupi Power Project in South Africa

In 2016, the IRM continued it monitoring activities of the Medupi Power Project. The IRM started the handling of the complaint about this project on 28 September, 2010 when it received the Request and registered it on 07 October, 2010 for com-pliance review. The Request raised the following issues: • Theprojectnon-compliancewithBanksafe-

guards policies;• The negative impact of theBank’s loan on

South Africa’s carbon reduction commit-ments;

• The burden of hidden costs due to publichealth risks resulting from emissions will be borne by the communities living near the Me-dupi plant;

• Corruptionandconflictofinterests;• Inadequateconsultations;and• The project will benefit large corporations

rather than the poor.

On 15 July 2011, the Boards of Director approved the investigation of four of the six issues raised by the Requestors. (The issue of corruption and conflict of interests as well as South Africa’s car-bon reduction commitments were referred to other competent departments of the Bank).

The IRM started its investigations in August 2011 and submitted the Compliance Review Report to the Boards of Directors on 24 January 2012 for consideration.

The document was discussed on 19 September, 2012, together with the Management Response and Action Plan. On 13 February 2013, the Boards adopted the Management Action Plan and authorized the annual monitoring of this Plan by the IRM.

The IRM undertook the first monitoring in 2015, after the desk assessment of Management’s su-pervision reports in November, 2014 and the field mission between 10 and 16 May, 2015.

The IRM prepared its First Monitoring Report, which was adopted by the Boards of Directors on 26 November 2015. The Report highlighted those areas needing improvement as well as the challenges that Management faced in its efforts to address the issues raised by the complai-nants. These included:

• Reducingtherisktopublichealthfromemis-sions;

• Strengtheningsupervisionmissions;• Completingregionalimpactsassessments;• ComplyingwithIntegratedWaterResources

Management Policy;• Improvingconsultationwiththecommunities;

and• Addressing the desecration of graves and

other heritage issues.

The work in 2016 focused essentially on the planning of the second monitoring of the status of implementation of the Management Action Plan and a desk review of two progress reports (5th and 6th updates), on the implementation of the Plan in the wake of Management’s supervi-sion missions of November 2015 and July 2016 respectively.

The assessment of these reports is required as part of the compliance review process as out-lined in the IRM Operating Rules and Procedures.

The two reports indicated significant achie-vement with respect to the mitigation actions being implemented, including improvement in the consultation with affected communities and in finding a lasting solution to heritage issues re-lated to the graves.

The Operations Phase Environmental Manage-ment Plan (OPEMP) was finalized and appro-ved by the Department of Environmental Affairs in 2015. The Regional Cumulative Impact Envi-ronmental and Social Assessment (RESA) study between Botswana and South Africa was fina-lized and due to be presented to the Government of South Africa for adoption in June 2016.

The IRM will verify the information provided by Management during its second monitoring mis-sion of the Medupi Project to South Africa, sche-duled for the first quarter of 2017.

24

The Boards of Directors of the Bank Group ap-proved a loan, not to exceed the aggregate sum of EUR 930 million and ZAR 10.63 billion, for the supply and installation of six boilers and tur-bo-generators for the project on 25 November 2009.

The total cost of the Medupi Power project was estimated at EUR 11.19 billion (UA 10.18 billion).

The project involves the construction of a 4,764 MW coal-fired base-load power plant in Lepha-lale, Limpopo Province, South Africa. It will be the fourth largest coal-fired power plant in the world. The Medupi project is classified as Catego-ry 1 high risk, due to its potential negative impacts on people and the environment.

The Bujagali Hydropower and Interconnection Projects in Uganda

No substantive work was done in 2016 by the IRM in monitoring the Bujagali Projects. The Complaint about the Bujagali Projects was submitted by the Ugandan National Association of Professional Envi-ronmentalists, a Non-Governmental Organization.

The complaint was registered on 16 May 2007 for compliance review. After subjecting the pro-ject to all the steps of the compliance review pro-cess, the IRM received the project completion reports after a long delay in May 2016 and is as-sessing the final status of resolution of the issues at the origin of the complaint.

The Bujagali Hydropower Project, approved by the Boards of Directors on 02 May 2007, was developed by the private company, Bujagali En-ergy Ltd. (BEL). BEL constructed a 250MW run-of-the-river power plant on a Build-Own-Ope-rate-Transfer basis at the Bujagali Falls on the Nile River near Jinja, (about 8 kms downstream from the existing Nalubaale and Kiira hydropower stations).

The Bujagali Interconnection Project is a public-sector project closely associated with the Bujagali Hydropower Project and was approved by the Boards of Directors of the African Development Fund (ADF) on 28 June 2007. The project provides the transmission infrastructure to interconnect the new Bujagali Hydropower Station to the national electricity grid.

25

The Hydropower project cost was estimated at US$ 750 million, with the African Development Bank (ADB) providing a loan of US$ 110 million (UA 73.8 million equivalent). The total cost of the Interconnection project was estimated at UA 50.13 (US$ 74.7 million equivalent) with the ADF loan of UA 19.21 million (US$ 28.6 million).

In 2016, the IRM received the Project Completion Reports for both Bujagali projects from Bank Ma-nagement, that is, the Extended Supervision Re-port for the Bujagali Hydropower Project and the Completion Report for the Bujagali Interconnec-tion Project. These two reports were to address the unresolved compensation issues which were pending following the IRM monitoring of the Ma-nagement Action Plan which was approved by the Boards of Directors in May 2009. This Action Plan contained the mitigation actions proposed by Management to address the instances of non-compliance as recommended by the IRM Experts Compliance Review Report which was adopted by the Boards of Directors on 9 July 2008.

It was in the context of the IRM monitoring of this Action Plan that the Experts undertook four field missions to Uganda and submitted the respec-tive monitoring reports to the Boards of Directors and the President. The 4th IRM Monitoring Re-port issued on 09 October 2012 recommended the Bank to ensure that the outcomes of remai-ning compliance issues relating to resettlement and compensation be included in project com-pletion reports.

The Report concluded that if the IRM, after as-sessing project completion reports finds them to have satisfactorily addressed the outcomes of compensation and resettlement issues in the two projects, then the IRM will undertake no further monitoring of these projects.

The Bank Management was to submit to CRMU the project completion reports by end of 2013. They were only received in May 2016 because of the extension of the projects. While assessing the outcome of the remedial actions to address the resettlement and compensation issues to enable them to close the case, the IRM Experts were made aware of additional complaints sub-mitted about the same projects to other Inde-pendent Accountability Mechanisms (Inspection Panel of the World Bank, Compliance Advisor Ombudsman of the International Finance Cor-poration (IFC) and the Complaints Mechanism of the European Investment Bank (EIB).

The IRM Assessment Report will be submitted in due course to the Boards of Directors.

The Complaint raised the following, among other issues:

• Inadequatesocialandenvironmentalimpactassessment;

• Inadequate consultation with the affectedcommunities;

• Inadequatecompensation;• Damsafety;and• Interferencewithculturalheritage.

26

27

3.1 Introduction

The IRM was mandated to undertake the adviso-ry services including the spot check function on 28 January 2015, when the Boards of Directors approved the amendments to the Resolution and the Operating Rules and Procedures of the IRM.

The key objective of this function is to enhance institutional learning and to promote a culture of compliance in the Bank. The advisory func-tion involves advisory services carried out by the CRMU, and spot-check advisory review of project compliance (the Spot-Check Advisory

Review) undertaken by the IRM Experts. The main objective of the spot-check exercise is to draw lessons from the experience of the IRM for the purpose of advising Bank Management on compliance issues associated with high-risk projects. In other words, beyond handling indivi-dual Requests, the IRM Experts also undertake investigations under the spot-check function. These spot-check reviews examine whether or not there has been an infringement of any Bank Group operational policies and procedures in the design, appraisal and/or implementation of a project. However, unlike the Compliance Review, the spot-check investigation is initiated internally within the Bank.

3 Spot-Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance

28

3.2 The Guidelines on the Operational Procedures for the IRM Advisory Function

In adopting the amended IRM Enabling Resolu-tion (B/BD/2015/03 – F/BD/2015/02) approved by the Boards on 28 January 2015, the Boards expanded the mandate of the IRM to include an advisory role, and the Boards stressed the im-portance of clarifying the scope of the advisory function, and clearly outlining the procedures, especially for the new Spot-Check Advisory Re-view of Project Compliance, in order to avoid any conflicts of interest by the IRM Experts. Subse-quently, the CRMU developed the Spot-Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance and Ad-visory Services (the Advisory Guidelines) to set out the operational procedures for the advisory function. The Advisory Guidelines include the scope of the advisory service and the modalities for conducting Spot-Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance. The Advisory Guidelines were circulated to Bank Management on 30 Oc-tober 2015 and subsequently submitted in May 2016 to the Boards of Directors for information.The two steps of initiating the spot-check pro-cess are:

• Each year, the CRMU in consultation withManagement is to select not more than two high-risk projects (i.e., projects with potential adverse environmental and social impacts) to be subjected to spot-check review to as-sess whether these projects have complied with the applicable Bank Group policies and procedures; and

• Once the projects have been selected, theDirector of the CRMU submits the list of these projects along with the Terms of Re-ference for the spot-checks to the Boards of Directors for consideration (in the case of ap-proved projects) or the President (in the case of projects under Bank consideration for fi-nancing). One of the three Experts from the IRM Roster of Experts carries out the spot-check exercise each year.

3.3 The Spot-Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance: The Road Sector Support Project II, Tanzania

The spot-check process for the Road Sector Support Project II, (RSSP II) Tanzania started on 14 April 2016 when the CRMU and the Bank Ma-nagement agreed to propose only one project, the Road Sector Support Project II in Tanzania, to undergo a Spot-Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance.

The RSSP II was selected for the spot-check exercise for three reasons. Firstly, this being the first spot-check exercise, there was need for a modest start-up with only one project to ensure a well-established practice for conducting future spot-check activities.

Secondly, the RSSP II is an infrastructure project classified as Category 1 in accordance with the Bank Group’s policies and procedures. The spot check of project could lead to identifying broa-der procedural issues behind the recurrence of Complaints raised by PAPs about Bank financed transport sector projects particularly with regard to the involuntary resettlement caused by these projects.

Finally, this project had already been the subject of a Complaint which was handled through an IRM Problem-Solving Exercise. During this exercise, the CRMU had observed a number of instances of non-compliance with Bank policies and proce-dures that warranted further assessment.

An example is where compensation processes appeared to have overlooked the requirements of the Bank Policy on Involuntary Resettlement, with the result that the PAPs received less compensation than that provided for in the project documents (i.e. compensation schedules and valuation reports).

29

In addition, a large number of small businesses had been resettled without compensation be-cause national legislation provides that compen-sation only be paid to relocate those businesses with audited accounts.

The Boards of Directors approved the proposed project for spot-check together with the Terms of Reference (TORs) for the Spot-Check Exercise on 04 May 2016.

Subsequently, the IRM conducted a desk review of project documents and a field mission to Tan-zania, from 18 to 23 July 2016.

During this mission, the IRM Expert visited the project sites and interviewed the PAPs, the pro-ject promoter TANROADS, the local authorities, the Bank staff responsible for the project and other stakeholders. At the end of the spot-check exercise, the IRM Expert prepared a draft Spot-Check Advisory Review of Project Compliance Report and submitted it to Bank Management for comment on factual issues. The findings and re-commendations of the Spot Check Report were adopted on 23 November, 2016 by the Boards of Directors. They, among other things, concluded that:

• The Bank followed the necessary due dili-gence process, and the RSSP II is largely in compliance with the Bank’s Environmental Policy.

• TheRSSPIIisnon-compliantwiththeBank’sInvoluntary Resettlement Policy 2003. Most notably, the issuance of demolition notices to PAPs to remove their properties before pay-

ment of compensation, inadequate consulta-tions with PAPs, non- compensation for loss of income for PAPs who had no formal land titles or owned small business which had no audited accounts, and the grievance redress mechanisms were not established at earlier stages of project’s activities to address com-plaints from PAPs.

• The RSSP II also failed the Involuntary Re-settlement Policy’s by not conducting a gap analysis during project preparations to iden-tify differences between the national laws and the applicable Bank Policies.

• TheBankguidancetotheBorrowertoimple-ment Bank’s safeguards was insufficient.

• The Spot-Check Report included projectspecific as well broader procedures recommendations which are meant to enhance institutional learning and compliance with Bank’s safeguards policies. The recommendations, among others, included:

• The Bank should consider financingcompensation costs for resettlement as part of its loans.

• The Bank should support Borrowers toimplement the Bank safeguards standards, and to enhance Borrowers capacities to benefit from cross country- learning processes.

• IncountrieswheretheBankhasalargeactiveportfolio in the road sector, the Bank should consider shifting from a strictly project based approach to a sector investment based approach. Investment financing would then be based on a sector investment program agreed upon with the government and preferably with other donors.

INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN A REQUEST

• A reference to the project, stating all the relevant facts including the harm suffered by orthreatened to the affected parties;

• Howthepartieshavebeenorare likelytobemateriallyandadverselyaffectedbytheBankGroup’s act or omission and what rights or interests of the parties were directly affected;

• Whenrequestingacompliancereview,anexplanationofhowBankGrouppolicies,proceduresor contractual documents were violated;

• Anindicationiftherehasbeenanypreviouscommunicationbetweentheaffectedpartiesandthe Bank Group concerning the issue (s) raised in the Request ; and

• InRequestsrelatingtomatterspreviouslysubmittedtotheCRMU,astatementspecifyingwhatnew evidence or changed circumstances justify revisiting the issue.

If some of the above information cannot be provided, an explanation should be included.

30

31

WHERE TO SEND A COMPLAINT

Requests must be sent to:

The Director Compliance Review and Mediation Unit (CRMU)African Development Bank Group (AfDB)

2nd Floor, Room 2A, CCIA Building, Abidjan PlateauAvenue Jean-Paul II

01 P.O. Box 1387 Abidjan 01, Cote d’IvoireTel1: +225 20 26 29 56Tel2: +225 20 26 29 00

Email1: BCRM_Info@AFDB.ORG with copy to S.toure@afdb.org and B.Kargougou@afdb.org.

Alternatively, request can be sent to any of the Bank Group’s field offices in the respective country of the Requestors

32

33

4 Outreach Activities

4.1 Introduction

The CRMU implemented outreach activities in 2016 in order to raise awareness about the IRM. The sensitization activities targeted Bank staff and the Boards of Directors, project implementa-tion units, civil society organizations (CSOs) and the media. These stakeholders were informed

about the procedures and challenges associated with the IRM’s handling of Complaints as well as the advisory services, so as to enhance institutio-nal learning. The CRMU communication activities generated knowledge products, drawing on the experience and lessons emerging from Com-plaints handling. The 2016 activities included national and regional workshops as well as parti-cipation in region-wide consultations with CSOs.

34

4.2 Activities organized by the CRMU

Consultations with the Boards of Directors: The Director of the CRMU held bilateral consulta-tions with the Members of the Boards throughout the year. These discussions allowed the Director of the CRMU to keep Board members fully infor-med of the activities of the IRM.

Staff Seminars in Bank Country Offices (Burkina Faso and Senegal): On 6 April 2016, the CRMU held a seminar for Bank staff in Burkina Faso with the participation of the Resident Representative. A similar session was organized for Bank staff in Senegal on 30 November 2016. The staff was briefed on the mandate, role and functions of the IRM and the CRMU under the IRM’s Operating Rules and Procedures. A lot of emphasis was put in explaining the responsibilities of Manage-ment and project implementation units during the Complaints handling process.

The National Workshop and Community Session on the IRM in Burkina Faso: A national informa-tion dissemination workshop on the IRM was organized from 04 to 05 April 2016 in Ouaga-dougou. The session was attended by 73 par-ticipants consisting of representatives of CSOs, project implementation units, as well as repre-sentatives of the Ministry of Economy, Finance and Development (MiNEFiD). Discussion focused on the role of CSOs in the IRM process as well as areas of potential collaboration between CSOs, project implementation units, relevant govern-ment structures and the IRM.

Community Session with Resettled People in the village of Bassinko (Burkina Faso): The PAPs are the main focus of CRMU’s outreach activities, hence the importance of direct interac-tion with them. The CRMU organized a commu-nity session with resettled people in the village of Bassinko in Burkina Faso. While there are re-current issues of resettlement and compensation for people affected by AfDB financed projects, the session helped to identify the specifics of the Bassinko case. The resettlement of the people was undertaken in the context of the Ouagadou-gou large scale peri-urban Sanitation Project af-fecting about 332 families. The session on 6 April

2016 was attended by 65 people from affected families who complained about their living condi-tions, including the lack of water, school, and health center in their resettlement site, which had been promised by the project.

4.3 IRM Participation in other Events

The Annual Meeting of Independent Accoun-tability Mechanisms (IAMs): The IRM was re-presented at the 13th Annual meeting of IAMs of International Financial Institutions held from 6 to 8 September 2016 in Manila and hosted by the Project Facilitator and Compliance Review Offices of the Asian Development Bank.

Regional Consultation Workshops: Partne-ring with Civil Society Organizations to deliver the Bank’s High 5s in West Africa and Central Africa: A CRMU study indicates that 55% of the claims received were filed by CSOs, compared with 45% by individuals. This highlights the importance of the role of CSOs in the work of the IRM.

Accordingly, the CRMU joined the Bank de-partment in charge of CSOs on 31 August to 2 September 2016 in Senegal in its regional consultations with CSOs in West African coun-tries. The CRMU participated in a similar regional workshop with CSOs in Central Africa from 26 to 28 September 2016 in Cameroon. Attendance at the workshop in Senegal was 60 participants while that in Cameroon was 50. These regional workshops developed Bank-CSO joint work plans and strategy to deliver on the priorities of the Bank (High5s). The CRMU sensitized the CSOs during these events.

International Financial Institutions (IFIs) Working Group meeting on Information Dis-closure and Stakeholder Engagement: The CRMU participated in the IFIs Working Group meeting on Information Disclosure and Stakehol-der Engagement held at the Bank’s headquarters in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire from 10 to 11 November 2016. In a panel discussion, the Director of the CRMU highlighted lessons emerging from the work of the IRM on project stakeholder engage-ment and grievance mechanisms.

35

4.4. Communication and Information Dissemination

IRM Webpage: One of the flagship actions of CRMU communication over this year has been the redesigning of the IRM web page on the AfDB website. The new webpage was launched in the wake of feedback received from CSOs, Requestors and other end users of the IRM. It is more user-friendly and will be regularly updated to facilitate access to IRM related information and improve CRMU and end-user engagement.

Dissemination of the IRM Rules and Annual Report: Dissemination of CRMU publications to all stakeholders continued. These publications include the new Resolution and Operating Rules of the IRM and annual report, which have been widely distributed to both external and internal stakeholders.

Communication: Communication plays a prominent role in helping the IRM to achieve its mission. The CRMU has carried out several outreach activities with its target stakeholders and produced a number of communication materials.

These were reviewed in 2016 and an updated strategy prepared on the communication activities and tools, with the following salient features:

New communication tools

• Non-traditional formats, including online we-binar training sessions, social media, the use and possible development of web, mobile and smart phone applications and the production of videos of varying lengths for use in training sessions, on the IRM web homepage, on AfDB’s homepage, and across various social media platforms.

Engaging strategically with stakeholders

• EstablishingpartnershipsbetweenCSOsandthe AfDB from the outset is crucial.

• Further develop and articulate ways of en-gaging CSOs to ensure effective and lasting collaboration (e.g. establish a secretariat for CSOs; consider capacity building for CSOs).

• Create platforms to facilitate engagementbetween CSOs, governments and the AfDB.

• EngagingCSOsduringcommunityconsulta-tions ensures early and effective discussions with concerned parties within the community and identification of contentious issues.

• MonitoringandevaluationofAfDBengagementwith CSOs and communities is needed.

36

37

Important trends and lessons are emerging from the handling of Complaints and the new Spot-Check Advisory Review process. The following are the key trends and lessons observed:

• OneofthenewRequestsregisteredin2016related to issues of technical support and cooperation opportunities in the agri-bu-siness industry. This seems to show diversifi-cation in the issues brought to the IRM, which until now have regularly identified inadequate public consultations, pollution, health, land and compensation.

• Compared to the number of Requests re-ceived directly from PAPs, the number of Complaints submitted by NGOs on behalf of these people continues to increase.

• The expectation of resolving the issuesbetween project promoters and the Reques-tors is not always met. The attempt by pro-ject promoters to resolve Complaints prior to CRMU problem-solving intervention did not materialize because the Bank did not follow up with the Requestors to ensure that their problems are adequately addressed.

• Bank Management, project implementationunits and the complainants participate genui-nely and in good faith in the Complaint han-dling process. The response has been most encouraging in the number of Complaint cases handled through Problem-Solving.

• Problem-solving facilitated the resolution ofthe majority of Complaints. For example, in cases involving disputes over compensation,

5 Trends and Lessons

38

the PAPs mostly do receive reparation in spite of the challenges associated with the discre-pancies often observed between national le-gislation on compensation on the one hand, and relevant Bank policies on the other. That said, the implementation of possible or agreed upon solutions in some projects was challen-ging particularly in compensation cases.

• In most cases, the Bank’s policies are notaligned with the national regulatory framework of the Borrower. However, in all the Complaint cases handled, these gaps were not properly identified and hence no mitigation measures were developed prior to project implementa-tion. The absence of gap analysis results in the increasing risk of Bank policies and proce-dures being violated and the frustration of Bor-rowers when affected communities challenge these policies and procedures by submitting Complaints to the CRMU.

• CSOs serve as effective intermediariesbetween affected communities and the IRM. An increase in Requests for compliance re-view by CSOs indicates their familiarity with Banksafeguardsrequirements.• Attent ionof PAPs is increasingly focusing on climate change and environmental issues.

• Complaintsaboutenergyandtransportsec-tor projects continue to top the list of the Re-gistry of Complaints. For example, out of the four Requests received by the CRMU in 2016, one was about a coal fired power plant and a second one concerned a road sector project, confirming a previously observed trend.

• Private-sector fundedprojectsandstaff fami-liarity with the IRM and safeguards issues need more focus. Requestors are increasingly de-manding information about cases, processes and follow up, signaling the need to strengthen communication and engagement with them

ADVISORY SERVICES

The CRMU was authorized by the Boards of Directors to provide advisory services on 28 January 2015. These services are triggered upon receipt by the Director of the CRMU of a request for ad-vice or technical opinion from the President and/or the Boards or upon approval by the President and/or the Boards of a proposal submitted by the Director of CRMU for such advisory service. The scope of the advisory service will be:

• RequestsforadvicemustbeconsistentwiththemandateoftheCRMUandnotbeproject-specific;and

• Uponthesubmissionofarequestforadvisoryservices,theCRMUwillprepareTermsofReferencethat clearly outline the scope of the advice sought. These Terms of Reference will be attached to the Advisory Note to be sent to the President and/or the Boards, as the case may be.

39

40

Mr. Sekou Toure,Director

Mr. Toure was appointed as the Director of the Com-pliance Review and Mediation Unit on 02 January, 2013. Prior to joining the African Development Bank, Mr. Toure was the Conflict Resolution Commissioner at the Global Environment Facility (GEF). The GEF unites 182 member governments, in partnership with international institutions, civil society organizations (CSOs), and the private sector, to address global environmental issues. The GEF provides grants to developing countries and countries with econo-mies in transition for projects related to biodiversity, climate

change, international waters, land degradation, the ozone layer, and persistent organic pollutants. Reporting to the Chief Executive Officer of the GEF, Mr. Toure was responsible for providing advice and leadership on the resolution of conflicts and disputes relating to GEF partnerships.

To overcome major impediments in GEF operations, Mr. Toure facilitated dialogue among the GEF stakeholders to mitigate the adverse effects of GEF financed operations and helped to build consensus and confidence in the process of compliance with GEF policies. Mr. Toure had moved to the GEF after serving as Director of the Regional Office for Africa at the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) from February 2001 to 05 September, 2007. In this capacity, Mr. Toure led UNEP’s engagement with the Africa Region, including the servicing of the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment and contribution to key initiatives such as the New Partnership for Africa’s Development. Prior to his tenure at UNEP, Mr. Toure had assumed responsibilities in senior positions in the Government of Côte d’Ivoire.

These included Junior Minister in charge of Water Resources Management (Haut Commis-saire à l’Hydraulique), Special Advisor to the State Minister in charge of Development Plan-ning, and Special Advisor to the Prime Minister. In addition, Mr. Toure had major responsi-bilities in a local political party in Cote d’Ivoire for a number of years. While in Cote d’Ivoire, he gained extensive international experience and exposure in the field of environment and water resource management. He has contributed to the work of CSOs in Africa. Mr. Toure has extensive research and teaching experience from working in the USA (University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire) and in Côte d’Ivoire (Institut National Polytechnique Felix Houphouet Boigny, Yamoussoukro and Universite d’Abobo Adjame, Abidjan). He has contributed more than twenty scientific and technical publications and has edited a scientific journal and a book. Mr. Toure holds a Ph.D. in Civil Engineering, specialized in Environmental Engineering from the University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, U.S.A., a M.Sc. in Civil and Environmental Engineering from the University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA and a B.Sc. in Civil Engineering from the École Nationale Superieure des Travaux Public (School of Civil Engineering), Yamoussou-sokro, Cote d’Ivoire.

6 CRMU Staff

41

Mrs. Adila Abusharaf, Chief Compliance Officer

Mrs. Abusharaf joined the Bank in 2007 and was the Officer-in-Charge of CRMU between February and December 2012. In this capacity, she was in charge of the administration of the IRM, including the receipt and registration of Requests, the problem-solving (mediation) process, outreach activities, monitoring and preparing the CRMU’s annual strategic work program and budget. Together with the IRM Experts, she determined the eligibility of Requests for compliance review and reported directly to the Bank Group’s President and Boards of Directors.

She has over 17 years of experience in international development having worked with the International Development Research Center (IDRC), University of Toronto, and York University in Canada, as well as having held positions as Regional Program Officer at the Center of Arab Women for Training and Research based in Tunisia, and as a lawyer in Sudan. Her work and scholarly publications focus on foreign direct oil investment and dispute resolution, compensation and resettlement, local governance, peace building and conflict-resolution, and gender-equity. Her work on these issues covers Algeria, Cameroon, Egypt, Mauritania, Morocco, Nigeria, Senegal, Tunisia, and Sudan. She obtained her Doctorate in Juridical Sciences from the University of Toronto in 2000, on private international law of transnational litigation and dispute resolution of oil pollution claims.

Ms. Grace Kimani, Principal Compliance Officer

Ms. Grace Kimani joined the Bank in June 2009. She supports the Director of the CRMU in assessing Requests, conducting outreach activities, collecting and analyzing Bank policies and procedures applicable to Requests registered by the CRMU for compliance review, preparing problem-solving missions and meetings, providing technical support to the IRM Roster of Experts, and representing the CRMU in internal and external meetings. She has experience in environmental matters having worked for five years with the legal department of the National Environment Management Authority (NEMA) in

Kenya. She holds a Master of Laws’ degree (LL.M) in Environment and Natural Resources Management and a Bachelor of Laws degree (LL.B), both from the University of Nairobi. She holds a Postgraduate Diploma (with Distinguished Honors) in International Environmental Law from the United Nations Institute of Training and Research (UNITAR).

She also has a Certificate on Climate Change and Development (at Masters’ Level) from the University of London in the United Kingdom. Her work experience has focused mainly on sustainable development, biodiversity conservation, climate change, hazardous waste/chemicals and environmental legislative drafting. She participated in drafting subsidiary legislation for Kenya in the conservation of biodiversity, water, waste, chemical, the management of zone depleting substance, and, noise and air pollution control.

42

Mr. Birima Fall, Senior Compliance Officer in charge of Information, Outreach and Knowledge Management

He joined the Bank in February 2016. He has the responsibility of coordinating communication activities ensuring that the mandate of the IRM is known to all stakeholders (Internal and external) and enhancing visibility of CRMU through outreach activities. He will also work with colleagues to ensure that data and knowledge are generated from problem solving, compliance and spot-check advisory reviews and advisory activities and adequately disseminated. He also support the other team members in better organizing their activities.

Before joining the Bank, Birima worked for nearly 3 years for the World Bank Group as Public Private Dialogue Specialist for West and central Africa and was based in Dakar. Prior to that, he worked for 7 years at World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) West Africa office in Dakar as Director of communication, Marketing and Partnership. In his early career, he worked as political journalist at the first private radio in Senegal. He was consultant for many international and regional organizations like UNESCO, ILO, WAEMU (UEMOA, OneWorld, IUCN, Wetlands International on communication and advocacy. Birima holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from the University of Sussex (Great Britain), Higher Diploma in journalism and communication from Cheikh Anta Diop University in Dakar (Senegal) and a Master’s certificate in English Literature and civilization from Cheikh Anta Diop University in Dakar.

Ms. Bernadette Kargougou, Compliance Assistant

Ms. Kargougou joined the Bank in 2010 and was transferred to CRMU in 2015. As Compliance Assistant, she provides support to the Director, professional and administrative staff of the CRMU in the handling of Requests/Complaints, the organization of outreach activities and the monitoring of information received through the CRMU info. Prior to joining CRMU, Ms. Kargougou served at the Human Resource Department & at the Office of the President. She also worked for 20 years with the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the United Nations Office for Project Services (UNOPS) and the African Futures Institute and gained extensive experience in administration, events management, programme support, finance, human

resources management and procurement. She graduated from the University of Technology of Burkina Faso and the Management College of South Africa and holds a degree in Business Administration.

43

Mrs. Dede Jacqueline Djedjero, Administrative Assistant

Mrs. Djedjero joined the CRMU in April 2009 and as Admi-nistrative Assistant provides administrative support to the Director of the CRMU and to the IRM Experts. She is trained as a bilingual assistant and translator (English/French). She helps the CRMU with the translation of working papers and with proof-reading of translated reports and IRM Board do-cuments. She provides support with procurement and lo-gistical matters, payment of consultants and the IRM Ex-perts and is the focal point of the CRMU’s administrative budget management. She has wide experience in the Bank

having worked with different departments, including operations where she worked for over 10 years and in the Human Development Department, comprising Health, Education and Poverty Alleviation.

Ms. Armelle Kokola, Secretary

Ms. Kokola joined the CRMU in September 2015 as Se-cretary. Her duties include providing administrative support to the Director of the CRMU and Staff in the coordination of missions, workshop as well as following up on procu-rement issues and other administrative duties. She gra-duated from Sight and Sound Education Ghana Limited, Ghana and holds a certificate in Conflict Management from CERAP-INADES, Abidjan. Before joining the Bank she wor-ked for 7 years in the Private Sector.

Mr. Sidi El Moctar Cheiguer, Consultant

Mr. Cheiguer is a Senior Consultant in Communication with more than 30 years professional experience, including with several international organizations, World

Bank, European Union, UNICEF, UNEP and the African Development Bank. He is currently working for CRMU as a Consultant. He is the President of ANEJ, the African Network of Environmental Journalists, one of the most im-portant Environmental organizations in Africa. Prior to that, Sidi Cheiguer was a journalist in Radio France International and BBC Africa based in Mauritania and served as Editor

in Chief for both TV and National Radio of Mauritania. Mr. Cheiguer studied Journalism and Philosophy at the University UCAD in Dakar, Senegal in the eighties.

44

45

7 Members of the IRM Roster of Experts

Dr. Mafing Kondé, Member

Dr. Mafing Kondé was appointed on 06 February 2012, as a Member of the IRM Roster of Experts by the President and the Boards of Directors of the African Development Bank Group. Dr. Kondé holds a PhD in Development So-ciology from the University of Paris X Nanterre, as well as a Diploma of Advanced Studies in Political Science from the University of Grenoble in France. He has almost thirty years of experience. Between 1984 and 1987, he worked as a lecturer at the University of Ouagadougou; Officer in Charge of Outreach for the Rural Water and Equipment Fund in Burkina-Faso; Sociology Research Officer in the

Société africaine d’étude et de développement (SAED); and a Research Coordinator for many development projects in Burkina-Faso.

Some of these projects were funded by international organizations and European coun-tries, such as the World Bank, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), and coopera-tion agencies of Denmark and the Netherlands. Thereafter, he joined Sahel-Consult as a sociologist where his work focused on water projects in Burkina-Faso. Since 1988, Dr. Kondé has been working as an independent consultant and has undertaken various assignments in Burkina-Faso and other West African countries including Niger, Mali, Cote d’Ivoire and Ghana for different international and national organizations: the World Bank, the International Union of Conservation of Nature (IUCN), the Danish Development assis-tance (Danida), the Italian Government, the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF), the United Nations-Women, the German In-ternational Cooperation Agency (GTZ), the Austrian Development Cooperation, the Swiss Cooperation, the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), the Inter-States Group of Schools (ETSHER), as well as the Ministries of Agriculture, Water Resources and Environment of Burkina-Faso.

These assignments covered a wide range of research and development projects inclu-ding research and work on the preparation, implementation and monitoring of projects in various sectors, local planning and development plans, environmental and social impacts studies, displacement and resettlement plans, and outreach activities. More specifically, his areas of specialization throughout his career have been in the analysis of land and water related issues, the implementation of decentralization and agriculture development, as well as participatory management of natural resources. Dr. Kondé is a member of diffe-rent national and international associations such as the Land Research and Action Group (GRAF), the Association of Independent Consultants and Partners (ACIA), the International Center for Sociological and Applied Law Studies (CINESDA) and the National Anti-Cor-ruption Network (RENLAC). For the purpose of assignments related to his membership to these associations, he has travelled to Turkey, Thailand, Greece and Nigeria.

46

Dr. Arntraud Hartmann, Member

Dr. Arntraud Hartmann was appointed on 01 June 2012, as a Member of the IRM Roster of Experts by the Pre-sident and the Boards of Directors of the African Deve-lopment Bank Group. Dr. Hartmann holds degrees in Law and Economics (Hamburg University and the American University) and Diplomas in International Relations and In-ternational Finance (Harvard University and John Hopkins University). She has more than 30 years of professional experience in development cooperation gained from wor-king with several international organizations.

Dr. Hartmann spent twenty-three years working for the World Bank, where she held senior management positions. She was Country Director for several southeast European coun-tries, Senior Advisor to the Managing Director and established the first Country Office of the World Bank in Romania in 1991 where she was the World Bank’s first Country Mana-ger and Chief of Mission. Prior to that, she held several positions for the World Bank as a Principal Economist for West African Countries and as Country Economist for Pakistan. In 2002 and 2006, Dr. Hartmann was a Senior Advisor to the Secretariat of the World Commission on the Social Dimensions of Globalization established by the ILO in Geneva, and was the Director of the Economic Policy Forum and International Institute for Jour-nalism of InWent, in Berlin, Germany. Since then, she has been a member of the Quality Assurance Review Process of IFAD, and has undertaken numerous consultancies for the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the German Federal Ministry for Econo-mic Cooperation and Development, the German International Cooperation Agency, GTZ and the International Fund for Agriculture.

Dr. Hartmann is an Adjunct Professor for Development Economics at the School of Ad-vanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, Bologna, Italy, and a visiting professor at the Hertie School of Governance, in Berlin, Germany where she regularly teaches. She is a Senior Fellow at the European Research Centre for Anti-Corruption and State Building, in Berlin, Germany. She undertakes research with the Brookings Institu-tion on aid effectiveness and has published extensively together with Johannes Linn, on “Scaling up of Development Programs”. In addition, she has published on Public Sector Performance Measurement, Poverty Reduction Policies, Aid Effectiveness and Structural Adjustment Programs.

47

48

8 Financial Matters

Year Activities Original Budget *Adjusted Budget Actual

2016

Meetings-Bank Business 114,544.51 119,984.51 8,880.23

Représentation 5 940,00 500,00 -

*Missions 60 961,82 100 961,82 54 313,19

*Consultancy 18 720,00 116 720,01 48 981,85

*Salairies 440 131,00 493 382,54 462 281,81

TOTAL : 640 297,33 831 548,88 574 457,08

*Adjusted through transfers within the internal orders. *Missions of CRMU Staff and the IRM Experts. *Consultancy fees of IRM Experts and other consultants.*Salaries of regular and short term staff.

49

50

9 Annexes

ANNEX 1: IRM Register of Requests by December 2016:

No.Date

RegisteredCountry Project Registered for Issues Status

128 Nov.

2016Guinea

Multinational: Road Development and Transport Facilitation Programme within the Manu River Union

Under assessment for compliance review

• Degradation of eco system.

• Inadequate impact assessment.

• Compensation and cultural heritage sites issues.

Notice of Registration issued. Eligibility assessment mission for compliance review scheduled in 1st quarter 2017.

210 Aug.

2016Senegal

Project: Construc-tion of a 125 MW coal Sendou Power Plant

Compliance review

• -No resettlement action plan prepared.

• -Inadequate consultations.

• -Encroachment on livelihoods.

• -Health risk due to emissions.

Eligibility mission com-pleted 30 November 2016. Eligibility Report under preparation and Planning for com-pliance review mission completed.

3 12 May 2016 Mali Diversification of the Activities of Modern Mills Project in Mali

Compliance review

- Compensation.-Encroachment on live-lihoods.-No resettlement plan.

compliance review of the project was approved by Boards on 23 Nov 2016 and investigations will be carried out in 1st quarter 2017.

4 07 Oct. 2015 KenyaThe Outer Ring Road Project

Problem-solving and Compliance Review

CompensationResolved. Review for compliance review.

5 09 July 2015 Kenya

Nairobi River Reha-bilitation and Res-toration Program: Sewerage Improve-ment Program

Problem-Solving CompensationResolved, to be closed in 2017

6 07 Mar. 2014 Uganda

Improvement of health service delivery at Mulago Hospital and in the City of Kampala

Problem-Solving

(1) Compensation (2) Inadequate due diligence in project approval procedures

On-going,

51

7 25 June 2012 Tanzania SRoad Support

Project IIProblem-solving

(1) Resettlement (2) Compensation

Closed to the satisfac-tion of the Requestors

on 16 July 2016

8 26 July 2011 SenegalDakar-Diamniadio Highway Project Problem-solving

• (1) Resettlement • (2) Compensation

Request successfully closed in December, 2012

9 07 Oct. 2010 South AfricaMedupi Power Project

Compliance Review

(1) In adequate Consultations (2) Disruption of livelihoods (3) Air pollution, and constrained access to water (4) Climate Change

2nd Monitoring of Management Action Plan is on-going.

10 29 July 2010 MoroccoConstruction of the Marrakech-Agadir Motorway Project

Problem-solving and Compliance

Review

(1) Constrained access to water, social amenities, (2) Damage to houses due to blasting, (3) Degradation of agricultural land, (4) Limited number of overpasses

Closed to the satisfaction of the Requestors on 16 October 2016, request found ineligible to undergo compliance review in January 2012.

11 22 July 2009 EthiopiaGibe III Hydroelectric

Power ProjectCompliance

Review

(1) Inadequate consultation (2) Loss of livelihood (3) Negative environmental impact (4) Negative transnational impact on Lake Turkana

Closed - Request deemed ineligible for compliance review as AfDB did not finance

this project.

12 15 July 2009 EgyptNuweiba Combined Cycle Power Plant

ProjectProblem-solving

(1) Potential Loss of Livelihoods (2) Negative Socio-cultural Impact (3) Road Safety (4) Damage to Marine Environment (5) Inadequate public Consultation

Closed - Mediation exercise discontinued and problem-solving report submitted to

the President and the Boards in March 2010 because the Govern-

ment of Egypt decided to relocate the project.

13 26 Mar. 2017 EthiopiaGibe III Hydroelectric

Power ProjectProblem-solving

(1) Inadequate consultation (2) Loss of livelihood (3) Negative environmental impact (4) Negative transnational impact on Lake Turkana

Closed – As the Ethiopia Government withdrew its request for funding the project from the Bank.

1404 June

2007Uganda

Bujagali Hydropower and Interconnection

Projects

Compliance Review

(1) Resettlement (2) Compensation (3) Environmental damage (4) Cultural and Spiritual issues (5) Dam safety (6) Inadequate Economic analysis.

Monitoring of Mana-gement Action Plan

is on-going. Manage-ment has submitted

to the IRM the Project Completion Reports.

Expected to be closed in 2017.

52

ANNEX 2: RECEIVED REQUESTS, BUT NOT REGISTEREDAS AT DECEMBER 2016

No.Request Received

Country Project Issues Reason for Non-Registration

1June 2016 Tunisia

Name of project not provided by complainants butis in the oil sector

-Water pollution.-Access to farms blocked by the oil company.-Locals not hired to provide labour to the company.

CRMU could not registered the complaint because the Requestors did not provide the name of the project to enable CRMU to follow-up. CRMU tried to reach the Requestors through their e-mail addressed failed.

2

June 2016Kenya

ADB/GoK Education III Project at Kitale Secondary School

Non-completion of the project which stalled immediately after it was started.

CRMU forwarded the request to the Department in charge of Education in the Bank for Follow-up with the complainants.

3 June 2016 Morocco Youth Agri-business Entrepreneurship Program

Denial of access to credit facility (finance) for implementing business plans developed under a training financed by the Bank

The Bank was not involved in pro-viding credit to the people trained. Therefore the CRMU could not register the request. However, CRMU tried to facilitate dialogue between the Bank County Office in Morocco and the Government of Morocco to see if the government can assist the Requestors to access the credit.

4 December 2015

Sierra LeoneAddax Bioenergy Project

Land issues, understanding the causes and effects of the development investment and support to local communities

Request was not registered, The Bank recovered its loan and was no longer involved in the project. CRMU facilitated dialogue between the requestors, the NGO that submitted the claim and the Bank.

5 September 2015

Mali

(NB: This case was registered in 2016 after CRMU received additional information from the Requestors)

Moulin Moderne du Mali

Resettlement, com-pensation

At the time, the complaint did not fulfill the criteria for registration of the Request. The Request made some reference to the involvement of the national courts .Paragraph II, b. 2.d: CRMU is not authorized to receive Requests relating to matters before other judicial review or similar bodies. Due to the uncertainties of the standing of the Mali case, CRMU is investigating to determine the eligibility of this request.

6 April 2015 Nigeria

Urban Water and Sa-nitation Improvement Project in Oyo and Taraba States

Allegation of presen-tation of fraudulent documentation during Procurement Process in Oyo State

The complaint is beyond the scope of the IRM. It was referred to ORPF procurement department and the Di-rector of Integrity and Anti-corruption Department (IACD) for action.

7 March 2015 Democratic Repu-blic of Congo

The Rural and Peri-Urban Electrifi-cation Project

Compensation

Request related to a project that the Bank is not financing. IRM Operating Rules and Procedures of 2015 man-date the IRM to handle only requests relating to projects under considera-tion for financing or financed by the Bank Group.

8 November 2014 Republic of Congo

Support to the Eva-luation of the Poverty Reduction Strategy Project

Private company claiming payment by government for work done

The Bank Management and the Government of the Republic of Congo through dialogue facilitated by CRMU are currently handling the complaint. The CRMU did not register this request in line with Para-graph III (b) of the IRM Rules which describes the people who can file a request to the IRM.

53

9 July 2014 KenyaOlkaria Geothermal project

Resettlement and compensation

AfDB is not financing this project and therefore, CRMU could not register it.

10April 2014 Kenya

Outer Ring Road Project

Resettlement and compensation

Previous IRM Rules of 2010 required the requestors to approach the Bank to resolve issues prior to submitting their complaint to the IRM. Paragraph III.b.5.e required the requestors to provide in the text of the complaint a description of the steps taken by the affected parties to resolve the problem with Bank Group staff, and explanation of how the Bank Group’s response was inadequate unless the Requestor(s) have requested confidential treatment pursuant to paragraph 8 of the IRM Rules; This requirement is overruled by the new IRM Rules of 2015.

112014 Republic of Congo

Projet d’appui au système de suivi et d’évaluation de la stratégie de réduc-tion de la pauvreté.

FacilitationRequest for CRMU Problem-Solving approach to assist in settlement of contract

12 2012 Senegal Public Road Project N/A

Complaint successfully handled by Senegal Field Office (SNFO) in line with IRM Rules 2010 Paragraph III.b.5.e as stated above.

13 2012 Kenya Public Road Project N/A

Complaint successfully handled by Kenya Field Office KEFO in line with IRM Rules 2010 Paragraph III.b.5.e as stated above.

142012 Madagascar Mining Project N/A

Request made by only 1 (one) individual and rejected since IRM Rules of Para.III.3.a.4.(a) stated “the CRMU has authority to receive Requests from the following people or entities: (a) any group of two or more people in the country or countries where the Bank Group-financed project is located who believe that as a result of the Bank Group’s violation, their rights or interests have been, or are likely to be, adversely affected in a direct and material way.

15September

2010South Africa Power Project N/A

Complaint relating to corruption referred by CRMU to Integrity and Anti-Corruption Department (IACD).The old IRM Rules of 2010 Para. II.b. ii stated that: “CRMU is not authorized to receive Requests relating to: fraud or corruption”.

16 2009 kenya Public Road Project N/A

Complaint successfully handled by Tanzania Field Office (TZFO). In line with the old IRM Rules of 2006, Paragraph III.b.e, the request should include: “a description of the steps taken by the affected parties to resolve the violations with Bank Group staff, and explanation of how the Bank Group’s response was inadequate”.

17 2009 Kenya Public Road Project N/A

Complaint successfully handled by Kenya Field Office (KEFO) In line with the old IRM Rules of 2006, Paragraph III.b.e, the request should include: “a description of the steps taken by the affected parties to resolve the violations with Bank Group staff, and explanation of how the Bank Group’s response was inadequate”.

The Independent Review MechanismAnnual Report 2016